Please join me in contributing to Cambridge Day–an important online newspaper dedicated to covering the city. I’ve taken the liberty of replicating the appeal it posted three days ago at https://www.gofundme.com/f/throw-local-news-a-lifeline-save-cambridge-day .

—Anita M. Harris

Cambridge is on the verge of losing one of its last remaining sources of local news.

The Cambridge staff of the now corporate-owned Cambridge Chronicle was eliminated almost a year ago. Cambridge Day, an online newspaper run by Marc Levy since 2009, has the last full-time staff devoted to covering the city, but will cease publication without immediate community support. With that support, however, Cambridge Day could take a huge leap forward in quality and comprehensiveness.

We need your help now

Cambridge Day has provided local news about schools, city meetings, neighbors in need, development, zoning and construction as well as a calendar of events and goings-on with archives going back some 20 years. Without it, we become yet another community starved for discourse, engagement and connection. Cambridge’s civic life is in danger without an independent local press. 

Help us reach our $75,000 goal

We, the Cambridge Local News Matters Advisory Board, are seeking immediate “breathing room” funding to keep Cambridge Day going while Marc develops a long-term plan for its sustainability and growth. Marc and Cambridge Day need to recruit an experienced publisher, survey the community and recruit a board of directors, among other steps.

Please contribute today! 

The future of our local news depends on it. Please make a donation here. And please tell your friends and fellow citizens.

And in the spirit of community-based news, please share your ideas about what you’d like to read about in your local news and features you would find useful. Write us at cambridgedaymatters AT gmail DOT com.

Taking this community news survey could help in planning too! It includes questions about what residents would most like to read and learn about in their local news and what issues matter to them most. Take the survey here.

Thank you for your support. Here’s to keeping us collectively informed and engaged. 

Cambridge Local News Matters Advisory Board

Susanne Beck – journalist, former executive of a foundation and nonprofit, investment banker

Rick Harriman – former chair of the Cambridge Community Foundation, innovation consultant

Mary McGrath – award-winning public radio and podcast producer, a journalist for 30 years

Bob Simha – past director of planning for MIT for 40 years

Kristen Wainwright – former literary agent and marketing and ad executive

Cathie Zusy – civic activist, former president of the Cambridge Club and former museum curator

HERE’S THE GO FUND ME LINK :

https://www.gofundme.com/f/throw-local-news-a-lifeline-save-cambridge

—Anita M. Harris

Anita M. Harris is an author, photographer and communications consultant based in Cambridge, MA. Her latest book, The View From Third Street, , is a memoir/social history of her experiences cofounding the Harrisburg Independent Press in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, during the 1972 Trial of the Harrisburg–just before Watergate.

New Cambridge Observer is a publication of the Harris Communications Group, also in Cambridge.

Newspapers have long kept tabs on the changing world–but have themselves been slow to modernize. To  flourish these days,
when anyone with a computer can be a publisher,  news organizations must develop a “culture of innovation. ”

So said Richard Gingras, the head of News Products at Google,  on May 11, 2012 in a talk at Harvard’s Nieman Foundation.

Gingras, a founder of Salon.com and long-term media technologist , said “I push people to rethink every aspect of what they’re doing”–including their mission, ethical guidelines, how they interact with their audiences, transparency regarding sources,  and even whether reporters divulge their personal political positions. In light of today’s powerful new technologies and human interactions,  “innovation  must be part of an organization’s DNA,”  at the core of newspapers’ culture, and  incorporated into “the role of every member of the team.”

Gingras pointed out that this by no means the first “disruption” time for the media.  With the advent of television,  for example, newspaper advertising declined and in some cities, the number of newspapers went from five to one or two.   This was not great for the newspapers that went out of business and  led to monopolitistic control by the  survivors. But it also led to    “40  golden years of profitability” for those survivors.

Today, the Internet has “disaggregated” the advertising economy., he said.  No longer do consumers look to their local newspapers for car ads, for example: rather, they search the Internet for information and deals.  “In the past, you could have an ad in the New York Times for Tiffany’s near an article on starvation in Darfur… or articles for garden centers in  the Lifestyles section,” Gingras said.   But on the Internet, such “vertical models” for advertising  are not effective.  ” Might news organizations’ Web sites do better as “a stable of focused brands with independent business models?” he asked.

Gingras also suggested that news organizations:

• Optimize news Web sites for multiple entry points,  because individual story pages are, today, more valuable than first or home pages. These individual pages should be updated so that urls remain constant–thus optimizing search engine results.

• Include more “computational journalism”–in which reporters post interactive information tables that would allow readers to answer their own, individualized questions.  For example, in a story on the state of education, provide tables showing student progress in school districts across the city–so that parents could assess statistics on their own children’s schools

•  Leverage the assistance of  “the trusted crowd”  (interact with readers and keep them involved)

•  Make reporters responsible for updating their own stories–with “constant” urls  to encourage multiple visits to their pages

Gingras also said that  in a culture of bulletpoints, updates and posts,  there  is low return on investment for long articles–and advised keeping articles  under 500 words.

So  I’ll quit here–at 494.

A video of the complete talk  is posted at: http://www.nieman.harvard.edu/newsitem.aspx?id=100198

–Anita M. Harris

Anita Harris, a former national journalist and Nieman Fellow,  is president of the Harris Communications Group, a marketing and communications firm located in Cambridge, MA.

Today at Harvard’s Joan Shorenstein Center on  Politics, Public Policy and the Press,  ProPublica  “distributed reporting” editor  Amanda Michel described a new form of newsgathering in which a few editors solicit and manage thousands of volunteers who research and write stories on a myriad of topics.

ProPublica is the nation’s largest nonprofit media organization to focus on investigative reporting. Founded in 2007, it is supported  mainly by a $10M a yearly grant from the Sandler Foundation.

The  method was developed by the Huffington Post during last year’s presidential campaign for a series entitled “On the Bus.”  Michel directed that effort, which employed 5 journalists who worked with some 12,000 citizens.

Michel was hired in May by  the New-York-City based  ProPublica, which employs 32 journalists and is led by Paul Steiger, the former managing editor of The Wall Street Journal. Its managing editor is Stephen Engelberg, a former managing editor of The Oregonian, Portland, Oregon and former investigative editor of The New York Times.

As ProPublica’s “distributed reporting” editor, Michel first used “crowd sourcing” and collaborative journalism methods to report on the impact of the federal stimulus bill. She is now integrating those newsgathering techniques into ProPublica’s other investigative efforts.

 To do so, she places queries on the ProPublica Web site, requesting assistance from the organization’s members, who are scattered throughout the US (and, possibly, abroad). They contribute their time “much as they would to a church or the humane society,”  Michel said.  

 ProPublica editors collect information from  the Internet and from members in the field–relying on journalists and volunteers for interpretation, analysis, and writing, Michel said.

 To maintain quality control, the editors set forth certain reporting requirements and “play the numbers game”–that is, they may ask several people to look into the same topic or report on the same event.  

Completed stories are  provided at no cost to ProPublica’s newspaper partners. One story about wrongdoing on a California Nursing Board first appeared in the Los Angeles Times and later ran on the ProPublica Web site.

Current  investigations described on the ProPublica Web site  include “Buried Secrets, Gas Drilling’s Environmental Threat”; “Contractors in Iraq Are Hidden Casualties of War;” ” Strained by Katrina, Hospital Faced Deadly Choices” and “Problem Nurses Stay on the Job as Patients Suffer.”

Other news organizations such as the Wall Street Journal and  WNYC radio, have recently hired journalists to serve as “putreach editors,” to develop “networked” or  “citizen journalism.”  The Cable News Network  and  Yahoo use similar techniques to engage the public in newsgathering, Michel said.

At today’s seminar, when a BBC editor cautioned that the “networked”  method could easily be subverted by unsavory forces seeking to present disinformation,  Michel  countered that that’s already a problem in traditional newsgathering. “Reporters are often ‘played’ by sources,” she said.

Based on my  background in the alternative press, (the Harrisburg Independent Press, AKA “HIP,” was a nonprofit) I think it’s exciting that members of the public can now help the media enhance understanding of the world we live in.  However, like at least one  seminar participant, I wonder  how long people will remain interested in contributing their time for free. 

Still,  for journalists concerned about losing their jobs to unpaid competitors,  not all is lost:  ProPublica is one of the few news organizations that is now actually hiring!

Here’s a link to another writeup about the seminar. http://www.hks.harvard.edu/presspol/news_events/archive/2009/michel_12-01-09.html

Let me know what you think!

—–Anita Harris

New Cambridge Observer is a publication of the Harris Communications Group of Cambridge, MA. We also publish HarrisCom Blog.

While conservative commentator Laura Ingraham said yesterday on the Today Show that  President Obama has accomplished little of worth in his first two months in office, CBS  Evening News Producer Rick Kaplan would strongly disagree.

At a seminar held on Tuesday at  Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard, Kaplan said that Obama’s record  so far has been “extraordinary.”

The “first 100 days” is a construct that began with FDR (Franklin Delano Roosevelt) and can be a useful time for judging what policies are most important to a president– before Congress and  administration insiders have  a chance to “carve out turf”… and “start bickering,” Kaplan said.

In his view, Obama has used this period well.

The President  has frozen all of former President George W. Bush’s last minute  “midnight regulations,” ended the  “gag rule” prohibiting mention of abortion in organizations receiving federal funds; put  forth ethics and lobbying bills; and passed the $800B TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) legislation, Kaplan said.

Equally impressive was  Obama’s performance at the recent G20 Summit in London.  “I’ve never seen anything like it,”  Kaplan said. At the meeting of the Group of Twenty Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors, “people  listened and were impressed. When he stood up, it was a proud moment for America.”

At news conferences, “he let the other guy go first. He grabbed President Sarkosi and the President of China; he huddled with them and [got] them to agree on a contentious set of…offshore policies. He makes the deal and at the end, both Sarcozy and the Chinese leader are smiling.

“In a meeting with the Russians on an arms deal, he gets a promise for a summit.  He meets with the South Koreans to talk about their concerns about [that day’s] North Korean missile launch….”

“And as he’s leaving…in an ‘organized leak,’ he said he would allow Cuban nationals to go and see their families and give them money.

“It was extraordinary to see him work the room in a respectful, aggressive, impressive. way. The leaders didn’t all agree with him, but they liked and respected him.”

“He’s had an extraordinary run in just 60 days. He never shows tension, never seems impacted one way or another or angry. He’s the ‘coolest guy in the room.”

Still, Kaplan said, not all is rosy.

For example,   the  President had known  known for weeks that bonuses were to be paid in Wall Street firms receiving bailout money, which made Obama’s  expressed “outrage” seemed hypocritical.  The press “let him off the hook a bit… It’s great to have dialogue, and the press corps is nervous about shaking up the relationship”  at a time [of economic crisis] where everyone is looking for stability.”

Asked (by me) what he foresees for the future of print media, Kaplan said that papers like the Boston Globe must survive,  and that the current “unwinding” could turn out to be healthy in the long run. It will likely lead to new models and  put an end to newspapers driven by owners who are more concerned about investors’ profits than their own communities, Kaplan said.

AMH

The New Cambridge Observer is a publication of the Harris Communications Group of Cambridge, MA.

Was surprised last night  when  two Pulitzer-prize-winning journalists locked horns on WGBH-TV’s  Greater Boston.

In a heated discussion of the New York Times’ threat to shutter the Boston Globe if employment concessions aren’t made,  former  Globe Columnist Eileen McNamara, who now teaches at Brandeis, charged that the Times is only out to save itself and doesn’t care about Boston or the Globe. She and host Emily Rooney criticized the Times for a lack of “transparency,” in threatening  to shut down the paper just a week after some 50 reporters were required to take buyouts or risk being laid off. McNamara called for an investigation into how Times Publisher Arthur Sulzberger, Jr. could have  so mishandled the papers’  strategies and finances.

Alex Jones, the former New York Times reporter who now directs Harvard’s Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy, said that Sulzberger has long been seeking ways to keep his papers on sound financial footing and pointed out that the Times and Globe are just two  of many papers threatened by  huge operating losses.  With countless subscribers migrating to “free” news on the Internet and advertisers cutting back in the current financial crisis, several papers have already declared bankruptcy.

I agree with Jones  that there’s no point in focusing on the New York Times as the bad guy in all of this;   the Globe is crucial to the Boston and New England communities, which must find ways to keep the paper alive.

The Boston Foundation  has put together a blue ribbon panel to seek with solutions–which might include a takeover of the Globe  by a consortium of nonprofits until the Globe’s economic situation improves.

The Globe reported this morning that both employees and management will be taking cuts in pay and security, and that 20 bloggers, organized by Paul Levy, president of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, simultaneously published a post asking readers to submit suggestions on how the Globe can improve its financial position.

(Levy’s blog is at runningahospital.blogspot.com).

I’ve joined the rally in a separate post.

I hope a solution is imminent  because good journalism provides crucial lifeblood to any community. As the so-called “fourth estate,” it serves as a watchdog on government, allows citizens to communicate with one another, and helps organize the thoughts, lives and livehoods of individuals and institution in a democracy.  Broadcast and Internet media certainly contribute to this–but, by and large, it’s  print reporters to do the heavy lifting.

AMH

Anita M. Harris is an award-winning former journalist who has founded a weekly alternative newspaper,  written for Newsday, produced documentaries for WRFM Radio and co-produced more than 100 live panel programs for the MacNeil/Lehrer Report (now the Newshour) of National Public television. She has taught journalism at Harvard andYale Universities and at Simmons College.

New Cambridge Observer is a publication of the Harris Communications Group of Cambridge, MA.

The New Cambridge Observer is pleased to join Beth Israel Hospital’s Paul Levy et all in the rally to help the Boston Globe. Here’s the post, followed by a partial list of participating bloggers. I believe the idea is to leave comments on Paul Levy’s blog at runningahospital.blogspot.com, but if you leave them here, I’ll link or forward.  AMH
Here’s the post:

Posted by Paul Levy at 4/06/2009 10:00:00 PM.

New Cambridge Observer is a publication of the Harris Communications Group of Cambridge, MA.

Partial list of participating bloggers:

http://runningahospital.blogspot.com/
http://www.bluemassgroup.com/
http://www.letstalkhealthcare.org/
http://healthblawg.typepad.com/
http://geekdoctor.blogspot.com/
http://patientdave.blogspot.com/
http://endlessknots.netage.com
http://billives.typepad.com/
http://cseries.typepad.com/celebrityseries/
http://amatterofdegree.typepad.com/a_matter_of_degree/
http://venturecyclist.blogspot.com/
http://www.insideoutchina.com
http://www.negotiationguru.blogspot.com/
http://baystateliberal.blogspot.com
http://hilforum.com/
http://www.byeday.net/weblog/networkblog.html
http://www.healthbusinessblog.com/?p=2137
http://mikegil.typepad.com/

April 07, 2009 5:26 AM

Paul Levy said…

And two more:

http://achronicdose.blogspot.com/2009/04/blog-rally-to-help-boston-globe.html

http://www.healthcontentadvisors.com/2009/04/06/blog-rally-to-save-the-boston-globe/

In his 3-05-09 post “Probe the Past to Protect the Future,”  Washington DC business-advocate- returned-investigative journalist Andrew Kreig says that the idea that the country should look forward without addressing the wrongs of the recent past is  “nonsense”.

He writes: As always,  justice starts by a review of the evidence. ‘Sunshine is the best disinfectant,’ Supreme Court Justice Louis Bandeis famously said. But pest control is useful too.  Either way, strong measures are required to build public confidence for legitimate initiatives on such complex questions as which companies are “too big to fail,” and which ones should pay the price for their terrible decisions.”

The media are unlikely provide much insight,  he implies.

Their income stream is increasingly dependent on affiliated businesses and not on serving subscribers. The major TV networks,  for instance, make virtually nothing form direct customer billings via cable and satellite, although many in the public naively assume that they’re being served via a “marketplace of ideas.”

In fact, traditional and new media alike depend heavily on the goodwill of government officials, plus advertising. The financial reports of the Washington Post, for instance, show that since 2007, it has been making more than ten times its revenue from its education industry affiliates as from its Post subscriptions,  new media are more entrepreneurial and increasingly broader-based in consumer appeal, many of their roots are in fairly recent federal Internet research and privatization policy–and many of their futures are highly dependent on favorable regulation, merger approval and stimulus spending.

Kreig calls for transparency in the Obama Administration’s decisionmaking process and for vigorous public pressure to ensure that current Congressional investigations into allegations of Bush Administration wrong-doing are not just for show.

I’m not anxious to delve back into the murky recent past and don’t relish the possibility of investigations, indictments, or imprisonments. Bytemperament, like Obama,  I’d rather move forward and let it all go.  But as George Santayana said, “Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”  I do think it’s important to find out why things went so wrong in hopes that we never have to go through times like those–or these–again.

AMH

New Cambridge Observer is a publication of the Harris Communications Group of Cambridge, MA.

With the ever increasing fall of bookstores and impending newspaper layoffs, I’d like to echo Alex Beam’s call for readers to reach for their wallets.

In case you missed his January 9 column, “Closing Costs,” in the Boston Globe, it opens: “Here is a dispatch from the Land of No Suprises: Bookstores–buffed by the recession, by Amazon, by electronic reading devices–are closing their doors”. He points out that, easy as it is to go to Amazon for books and read newspapers online for free, by behaving normally, “you kill the things you love.”

In Boston, after several waves of reporter buyouts, people keep telling me that they’ve dropped their subscriptions to the Globe because it’s gone downhill, and, anyway, they can get it on line, for free. Duh.

My apologies for stating the obvious, but many of my friends don’t seem to get that, in  a vicious financial cycle,  with fewer paying customers,   the paper can get fewer advertisers, revenues go down, and, as a result, the Globe and many other papers have had to  “encourage”  their most senior,  talented reporters to leave.  The Globe announced  a new round of editorial layoffs just last week.

I’ll be writing more about this–but for the time being, please support the  free press–by paying for it.

The New Cambridge Observer is a publication of the Harris Communications Group, of Cambridge, MA.